People v. Riley

The court properly exercised its discretion when it declined to grant a six-day adjournment, in the midst of a relatively short trial, so that defendant could call a police officer to whom the *380victim had given a statement containing a purported inconsistency (see Matter of Anthony M., 63 NY2d 270, 283-284 [1984]; People v Foy, 32 NY2d 473, 476 [1973]). Defense counsel, who made it clear to the jury that he was reading from a District Attorney writeup, extensively cross-examined the victim about the statement, and she denied making it. Furthermore, the uncalled officer’s testimony at a…